RENDERED: APRIL 28, 2023; 10:00 A.M.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Commonwealth of Kentucky

Court of Appeals

NO. 2022-CA-0487-MR

ANGELA TUCKER APPELLANT 

v. 

APPEAL FROM WOODFORD CIRCUIT COURT

HONORABLE JEREMY MICHAEL MATTOX, JUDGE

ACTION NO. 21-CI-00027

UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY 

FEDERAL CREDIT UNION; LANES VIEW 

NEIGHBOORHOOD ASSOCIATION 

HOME OWNER’S ASSOCIATION; 

AND WELLS FARGO APPELLEES 

OPINION

AFFIRMING

**   **  **

BEFORE: THOMPSON, CHIEF JUDGE; KAREM AND MCNEILL, JUDGES.

THOMPSON, CHIEF JUDGE: Angela Tucker, pro se, appeals from an order 

granting summary judgment in favor of the University of Kentucky Federal Credit 

Union (hereinafter referred to as the Credit Union). We find no error and affirm.
-2-

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On April 7, 2008, Ms. Tucker entered into a home equity loan with 

the Credit Union for $35,000. Ms. Tucker gave the Credit Union a mortgage on 

her house in order to secure the loan. On February 9, 2021, the Credit Union filed 

the underlying action seeking to recover the amount owed on the mortgage. The 

Credit Union claimed that Ms. Tucker had not been making the requisite payments. 

On May 20, 2021, the Credit Union filed a motion for summary judgment. The 

evidence presented by the Credit Union showed that Ms. Tucker had not been 

making full payments on the mortgage, only partial payments. The trial court 

granted summary judgment and this appeal followed. 

ANALYSIS

The standard of review on appeal of a summary 

judgment is whether the trial court correctly found that 

there were no genuine issues as to any material fact and 

that the moving party was entitled to judgment as a 

matter of law. . . . “The record must be viewed in a light 

most favorable to the party opposing the motion for 

summary judgment and all doubts are to be resolved in 

his favor.” Summary “judgment is only proper where the 

movant shows that the adverse party could not prevail 

under any circumstances.” Consequently, summary 

judgment must be granted “[o]nly when it appears 

impossible for the nonmoving party to produce evidence 

at trial warranting a judgment in his favor[.]”

Scifres v. Kraft, 916 S.W.2d 779, 781 (Ky. App. 1996) (citations omitted). 

“Because summary judgment involves only legal questions and the existence of 
-3-

any disputed material issues of fact, an appellate court need not defer to the trial 

court’s decision and will review the issue de novo.” Lewis v. B & R Corporation, 

56 S.W.3d 432, 436 (Ky. App. 2001).

Appellant argues that because she was making some payments, the 

Credit Union could not file the underlying lawsuit. She also argues that because 

she was in forbearance with her primary mortgagor, Wells Fargo, she did not have 

to make payments to the Credit Union. Here, the evidence unequivocally shows 

that, while Ms. Tucker was making some payments to the Credit Union, she was 

not making full or complete payments. Around the time that the Credit Union filed 

this action, Ms. Tucker had over $6,000.00 in payment arrearages. Failure to make 

full and timely payments violated the agreement between Ms. Tucker and the 

Credit Union; therefore, the Credit Union properly brought this action. 

Furthermore, a forbearance with Wells Fargo has no bearing on her agreement with 

the Credit Union. Ms. Tucker was not in forbearance with the Credit Union.

CONCLUSION

Based upon the foregoing, the trial court did not err in granting

summary judgment to the Credit Union. There were no genuine issues of material 

fact that would have precluded summary judgment and the Credit Union was 

entitled to judgment as a matter of law. 
-4-

ALL CONCUR.

BRIEFS FOR APPELLANT:

Angela Tucker, pro se

Versailles, Kentucky

BRIEF FOR APPELLEE

UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY 

FEDERAL CREDIT UNION:

Gregory D. Pavey

Felisa S. Moore

Lexington, Kentucky